Speaker 1: You're listening to Comedy Central.
Speaker 2: From the most trusted journalists at Comedy Central.
Speaker 3: It's America's only sorts for news.
Speaker 1: This it's the daily Joke.
Speaker 3: With your host show Stood.
Speaker 1: Hie. Welcome.
Speaker 2: Hi.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna go sort listen. I hope you guys had
Speaker 1: a wonderful holiday. We got a great job for tonight.
Speaker 1: Former Deputy Attorney General eight is going to be joining
Speaker 1: us and I have no idea, but I truly hope
Speaker 1: you guys had a lovely Thanksgiving, whether you were at
Speaker 1: home and family or on the road trip of a lifetime.
Speaker 3: But huge news from the entire holiday.
Speaker 1: Week, starting with once again another incredibly controversial Trump administration nominee,
Speaker 1: Cash Battel. It's been nominated to d the FBI. It
Speaker 1: seems like a perfectly little judging tonight, little crowd. Is
Speaker 1: it the tie? What are we doing right here? I mean,
Speaker 1: what would be to worry about here? Cash Betel?
Speaker 3: And I don't say this lightly is the most dangerous
Speaker 3: nominee that you've seen yet to our democracy.
Speaker 4: We're talking about somebody who has espoused QAnon conspiracy theories.
Speaker 5: Saying that the twenty twenty election was stolen.
Speaker 1: He has no other agenda, but revenge.
Speaker 3: Somebody who says he's going to throw judges in jail,
Speaker 3: he's going to throw bureaucrats in jail, he's going to
Speaker 3: throw reporters in jail.
Speaker 1: I didn't hear anything about comedians, so I look, none
Speaker 1: of this sounds good. And while many presidents, including Democrats,
Speaker 1: I've threatened to jail reporters, it's true they didn't do
Speaker 1: all of them. Is there any reason why Patel should
Speaker 1: be confirmed. My name is Caspertel, and I have written
Speaker 1: the first ever children's Russia gate book. It's called The
Speaker 1: Plot Against the King. I did not meet with Russia
Speaker 1: in a box. I did not meet with Russia on Fox.
Speaker 1: I did not meet them in Trump Tower. I did
Speaker 1: not have a golden shower. This nominee is going to
Speaker 1: be very controversial.
Speaker 5: Republicans and Democrats should be.
Speaker 6: Examining how damaging this nomination could be to American democracy.
Speaker 1: What's at risk is the overall rule of law in
Speaker 1: the United States. This is a really dangerous moment for
Speaker 1: our government and for the rule of law in America.
Speaker 1: Faith and the rule of law is all that separates
Speaker 1: us from the otters, the penguins, the apes, really the
Speaker 1: entire cast of Madagascar. It's the only thing faith in
Speaker 1: the rule of law. Finally, democrats have a moral perch
Speaker 1: from which they can judge without shame, hypocrisy, or nuance.
Speaker 1: Breaking news, President Biden has issued a pardon for or
Speaker 1: his son Hunter Biden.
Speaker 3: Mother, we were so but you know what, God got fine,
Speaker 3: it's good, it's right, it's just right.
Speaker 1: You an eighty two year old man doesn't want to
Speaker 1: spend the rest of his life visiting his son in prison.
Speaker 3: Fubcans can't a wait with this shit all the time.
Speaker 3: I'm sure the pardon is a.
Speaker 1: Narrowly written, precisely drawn farewell note of compassion for a
Speaker 1: loved one.
Speaker 7: The pardon sweeping covering offenses that Hunter Biden quote has
Speaker 7: committed or may have committed, or taken part in over
Speaker 7: the past eleven years.
Speaker 1: Eleven years is a very specific rounded amount of time.
Speaker 1: So Hunter, I'll give you a pardon a few years,
Speaker 1: five years, ten years, it needs to be eleven And
Speaker 1: if you would be so kind, make sure this upcoming
Speaker 1: New Year's Eve is also covered.
Speaker 3: Shit's going to get Chris.
Speaker 1: I didn't know pardons could cover for crimes. You may
Speaker 1: have committed him. I'm surprised Biden didn't include the phrase
Speaker 1: on Earth one or any of the Earth's in the multiverse. Now,
Speaker 1: some would say that's what any loving father would do
Speaker 1: for their troubled son or daughter, should they have the power.
Speaker 1: But on Fox News, it was this love, in fact,
Speaker 1: that may have caused the problem in the first place.
Speaker 5: My dad always told me Ainsley, if you get arrested,
Speaker 5: don't call me. I'm not your first phone call. I'm
Speaker 5: leaving you in there.
Speaker 1: Good nights. Your dad always told you that. Were you
Speaker 1: a degenerate or was your dad de Niro? No, listen,
Speaker 1: listen to me.
Speaker 3: No you get pinched, I'm not your first phone call.
Speaker 1: I don't know you. He's ten grand and a gun
Speaker 1: on the floorboards. Good luck, kid, and by the way,
Speaker 1: not just amboy. The rest of the Fox Cinematic universe
Speaker 1: was no happier.
Speaker 7: Probably the worst president in US history, but also the
Speaker 7: most corrupt.
Speaker 1: This entire administration has been nothing but as jam. He
Speaker 1: and his family are so full of slime that Nickelodeon
Speaker 1: is going to sue for trademark infringement. You Joe Biden,
Speaker 1: You Joe Biden.
Speaker 3: Megan Kelly, who do you think you are.
Speaker 2: Me?
Speaker 3: What am I supposed to say?
Speaker 1: Now? It was my line.
Speaker 3: You're solen my two line at long last?
Speaker 1: Have you no decens.
Speaker 3: Me?
Speaker 1: Of course, no one was more outraged than America's judicial compass,
Speaker 1: Donald Seneca.
Speaker 4: Trump, President elect Trump laying in as well, He says,
Speaker 4: does the pardon given by Joe to Hunter.
Speaker 1: Include the January sixth hostages who have now been in
Speaker 1: prison for years? Such an abuse and miscarriage of justice?
Speaker 3: Oh?
Speaker 1: You pardon your son? What about the people who tried
Speaker 1: to help me overthrow the government? That's kind of a
Speaker 1: leap there. It's like going, you know, oh, you're gonna
Speaker 1: let the kids stay up to watch SNL, but you're
Speaker 1: not even gonna try to help me burn the neighbor's
Speaker 1: house down.
Speaker 3: So obviously we're publics are going to criticize.
Speaker 1: But Biden did make this line of attack particularly available,
Speaker 1: seeing as how he spent so long saying you wouldn't
Speaker 1: do it, because of how much he respects the system.
Speaker 6: I'm not gonna do anything, I said. I adde by
Speaker 6: the jury decision, and I will do that, and I
Speaker 6: will not pardoner.
Speaker 1: Will you accept the jury's outcome? Their verdict? No matter
Speaker 1: what it is. Yes, and have you ruled out a
Speaker 1: pardon for your son? Yes? Now watch this dive.
Speaker 3: But there there.
Speaker 1: I don't know if you've ever found in some of
Speaker 1: this situation. If you ever find yourself in a situation where
Speaker 1: you are being questioned about pardoning your son, do not
Speaker 1: do it at the swim up bar of a club.
Speaker 3: Med and also not for nothing with.
Speaker 1: An old I mean, Biden squints indoors, so you don't
Speaker 1: face the guy in the sun and try and get
Speaker 1: an honest is it immediately looks untrustworthy? You're gonna give
Speaker 1: him a pardon? But you know what, ladies and gentlemen,
Speaker 1: hypocrisy is ant illegal, nor is it particularly unusual in politics.
Speaker 1: It's not like he's ever gonna run again, So why
Speaker 1: not take care of your kid even if you said
Speaker 1: you weren't gonna I respect it. I don't have a
Speaker 1: problem with it. The problem is the rest of the
Speaker 1: Democrats made Biden's pledge to not pardon Hunter the foundation
Speaker 1: of their defense of America. This grand experiment.
Speaker 7: One political party remains committed to the rule of law
Speaker 7: and the other doesn't.
Speaker 1: It's that simple, Hunter, Biden's not above the law.
Speaker 5: No one is above the law.
Speaker 3: Democrats stand for the rule of law.
Speaker 8: We accept the outcome because that's how the rule of
Speaker 8: law works.
Speaker 9: Because the justice system that convicted is only surviving son
Speaker 9: is the same.
Speaker 1: Justice system he's vowed to protect.
Speaker 9: And if that doesn't tell you who Joe Biden is,
Speaker 9: I don't really know.
Speaker 1: What does.
Speaker 10: I think I know what does. And now look at
Speaker 10: the dance.
Speaker 1: Democrats have to do. Be honest, the only reason why
Speaker 1: they went after a hunter the way they did, and
Speaker 1: I've talked to many federal prosecutors about this, is because
Speaker 1: he's the president's son.
Speaker 3: People have to remember the president has lost two children
Speaker 3: already and he does not need to lose another one
Speaker 3: to more political which hunts.
Speaker 5: The you know, crawling from Republicans.
Speaker 4: But we're talking about you know, Donald Trump is a
Speaker 4: convicted felon who literally.
Speaker 1: Pardoned his daughter's.
Speaker 5: Father in law and just made an ambassador to France.
Speaker 1: So for anyone that wants to clutch their pearls now
Speaker 1: because he decided that he was going to pardon his son,
Speaker 1: I would say, take a look in the mirror, ma'am.
Speaker 1: We will take a look in that mirror, but we
Speaker 1: are taking off so you could just put this shit
Speaker 1: on airplane mode and let us get home for the holidays.
Speaker 3: Yes, yes, yes, yes to everything that you guys were saying.
Speaker 1: If you hadn't made Hunter Biden not receiving a pardon
Speaker 1: the Mason Dixon line of morality between Democrats and Republicans,
Speaker 1: there's a big gap between the laws, the only thing
Speaker 1: that separates us from the animals. And monkey threw shit
Speaker 1: at me first.
Speaker 3: I had no choice. This is what Biden's decision has done.
Speaker 1: Look how confident and eloquent our Democratic representatives were back
Speaker 1: when they thought they had the moral high ground on
Speaker 1: this issue.
Speaker 8: I've not heard a single Democrat anywhere in the country
Speaker 8: cry fraud, cry fixed, cry rigged, a cry kangaroo court.
Speaker 8: You don't hear a single peep out of any Democrats
Speaker 8: saying that. Why we believe in the rule of law.
Speaker 1: And now look at what even he one of the
Speaker 1: most verbally dexterous attorneys we have on Capitol Hill, has
Speaker 1: been reduced to.
Speaker 5: Do you think President Biden should pardon Hunter Biden?
Speaker 8: So there are lots of claims of political prosecution, and it.
Speaker 5: Was Hunter politically.
Speaker 8: Well, I mean, obviously that's a judicial point and then
Speaker 8: you've got to look at what the evidence is.
Speaker 5: And I don't know should the president him?
Speaker 8: I mean again, that is a unilateral executive power, you know,
Speaker 8: power that uh.
Speaker 5: And should he use it?
Speaker 10: Well?
Speaker 1: You know, the.
Speaker 8: Power exists for the president to show mercy for people.
Speaker 1: I mean, I mean we have an executive and we
Speaker 1: have a judicial and then a legislative and then small bomb.
Speaker 1: Oh here.
Speaker 3: Time I've crouched since Thanksgiving and oh that did not
Speaker 3: go well. But then why this weekend?
Speaker 1: Normally you drop a controversial pardon like the way you
Speaker 1: buy porn at a gas station, in a flurry of
Speaker 1: other distracting purchases and pardons. Will you give me the breath?
Speaker 1: Minstead to w D forty to squeegee there one of
Speaker 1: those anal magazines.
Speaker 9: Some corn Nuts, pardon for my son, the big Dits
Speaker 9: like Chicks pamphlet.
Speaker 3: So why did you do it?
Speaker 1: Now?
Speaker 7: As NBC News first reported, the President did decide to
Speaker 7: reverse course O for the holiday weekend. Had his family
Speaker 7: these annual Thanksgiving getaway in Nantucket Thanksgiving, I knew it.
Speaker 1: Perhaps I can explain the way this pardon went down
Speaker 1: in my new one man show, Can You Get Hunter?
Speaker 1: To stop looking at me like that. I take you
Speaker 1: there now, I'll be playing the role of hunter. How
Speaker 1: are you father? Are you well fathered? I'm a bit down,
Speaker 1: you know, last Thanksgiving with the family for a while.
Speaker 1: If only someone change that. This turkey is deligious obviously
Speaker 1: not one of the ones that was pardoned. I made
Speaker 1: you watch that because people think I can't act anyway
Speaker 1: still on camera. Look, man, the Democrats made this case
Speaker 1: an example of why Americans should believe in our system,
Speaker 1: and it's hard. Democrats have the tougher road of defending
Speaker 1: our institutions and systems as being flagged but still valuable.
Speaker 3: Republicans just run on blowing this shit up.
Speaker 1: But at every turn, Democrats keep getting caught creating a
Speaker 1: purity test for a system that they can't seem to
Speaker 1: pass themselves.
Speaker 7: When you saw the photograph of the top secret documents
Speaker 7: laid out on the floor of Mara a Lago, what
Speaker 7: did you think to yourself?
Speaker 6: How that could possibly happen? Anyone could be that irresponsible?
Speaker 1: They're responsible the capitul stewardship of our nation's most classified
Speaker 1: documents as foundational to the institutions. It's why we are
Speaker 1: What's that oh really in his garage next to his car.
Speaker 1: Parse away.
Speaker 6: By the way, my corvette's in the locked garage.
Speaker 7: Okay, so it's not like you're sitting down in the street.
Speaker 1: It's totally different. Enemies of our nation would have to
Speaker 1: get on the tippy toes to peer into the garage
Speaker 1: to see those documents using some sort of image captured technology,
Speaker 1: which I'm sure doesn't exist. Spies would also be distracted
Speaker 1: by my sickest corvette.
Speaker 3: And but's not forget.
Speaker 1: In contrast to Donald Trump, the moral stan Biden took
Speaker 1: on Saudi Arabia after they murdered one of our journalists.
Speaker 3: We were going to.
Speaker 6: In fact make them pay the price and make them
Speaker 6: in fact the pariah that they are.
Speaker 1: Yeah, boom Kishogi will not be forgotten. Candidate Biden says,
Speaker 1: this moral line must be drawn, and President Biden tonight
Speaker 1: with one fistbump of pariah no more.
Speaker 3: It's just the fith bump. It's just the fis bump.
Speaker 3: Come on, don't know.
Speaker 1: Trump would have probably done the whole.
Speaker 10: Like boom, that is a moral.
Speaker 3: Line I won't draw, I'll.
Speaker 1: But he would have done the whole boom. And of
Speaker 1: course there's the border.
Speaker 6: We're going to restore our moral standing in the world
Speaker 6: and our our historic role as a safe haven for
Speaker 6: refugees and asylum seekers. My Lord, We've never we've never
Speaker 6: made a signum seekers stay seek asylum outside the United
Speaker 6: States of America.
Speaker 3: We've never done it.
Speaker 1: Tomorrow what Trump is doing, until, of course, my poll
Speaker 1: numbers start to go down.
Speaker 6: Today, I'm announcing actions to bar migrants who cross our
Speaker 6: southern border unlawfully from receiving asylum.
Speaker 3: Rules, loopholes and norms.
Speaker 1: The distance between the systems Democrats say they are revering
Speaker 1: and the one that they're using when they need to
Speaker 1: is why people think it's rigged.
Speaker 3: Use the rules, use the loopholes, the norms.
Speaker 1: But also use it to help the people, not just
Speaker 1: those people related to you. All of us are somebody's
Speaker 1: son or somebody's daughter, and we all need that break too,
Speaker 1: Because if there's one thing I've learned, especially this weekend,
Speaker 1: it's that everyone deserves a chance to.
Speaker 11: Shy.
Speaker 2: Well, we come back, We're gonna talk more about him,
Speaker 2: Sally ads, don't go away.
Speaker 11: Tell about him mon back in the downtil my death tonight.
Speaker 1: Served in the Department of Justice for nearly thirty years
Speaker 1: over many different administrations, including two years as Deputy Attorney
Speaker 1: General and Acting Attorney General at the beginning of the
Speaker 1: first Trump administration. These welcomes program sallyades, Hello.
Speaker 3: How are you?
Speaker 5: Thanks? How about you?
Speaker 1: I'm doing great. I wanted to add you know, when
Speaker 1: we asked you to come on the show, it was
Speaker 1: prior to the pardon kerfuffle and the new head of
Speaker 1: the FBI and the new AG And I want to thank.
Speaker 5: You you noticed that for well, yeah, thank you for.
Speaker 1: Not calling up and saying I have COVID, which how
Speaker 1: hard is it? You read DOJ for how long?
Speaker 5: Twenty seven years?
Speaker 1: Twenty seven years?
Speaker 5: But who's counting you?
Speaker 1: None of us? What is your impression? Now? Tell us
Speaker 1: a little bit about what's so crucial about the DOJ?
Speaker 1: What what do they do? I think we don't necessarily
Speaker 1: have an understanding of the nuts and bolts of it.
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, well thanks for asking that, because I know
Speaker 4: a lot of people get their vision of the Department
Speaker 4: of Justice on the high profile things that go on
Speaker 4: in the news. But I can tell you that what
Speaker 4: you have at DOJ is a group of people, Republicans
Speaker 4: and Democrats who are there who are absolutely devoted to justice.
Speaker 4: And I know that sounds incredibly corny, but these are
Speaker 4: people who want to be public servants. They want to
Speaker 4: make this country safer for all Americans, and so they
Speaker 4: prosecute child pornography cases and human trafficking and drug cartels
Speaker 4: and gangs.
Speaker 1: And this is the majority of the world.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, this is the majority of the work across the
Speaker 4: board that is done in a non partisan way. And
Speaker 4: you know, I had the privilege of working with these
Speaker 4: folks for so many years and saw them truly struggle
Speaker 4: over cases, not just whether they could get the indictment
Speaker 4: or get the conviction, but in trying to.
Speaker 5: Do the thing that was fair and just.
Speaker 4: Because that is and I know this sounds corny, that
Speaker 4: is the sole responsibility of the Department of Justice is
Speaker 4: to seek justice. Now, not everybody's going to agree with
Speaker 4: you when you take actions about whether those things are
Speaker 4: just or fair, but that is the responsibility.
Speaker 1: Did you see in your time when you were there,
Speaker 1: did you see the mission begin to change? Did you
Speaker 1: see it become politicized while you were there when you
Speaker 1: first started, was it much more nuts and both, because
Speaker 1: I guess that's not the part of the Justice, Department
Speaker 1: of Justice that I also think about. I think about
Speaker 1: after nine to eleven. You know, John, you getting the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice to justify torture or you know that
Speaker 1: there is there another hallway where like there's another Department
Speaker 1: of Justice where like you guys are working on human trafficking,
Speaker 1: but they're there trying to justify other may be less
Speaker 1: what you would say high minded things.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 4: Look, the vast majority of folks at the Department of Justice,
Speaker 4: or what they called career employees, and that doesn't mean
Speaker 4: that they're necessarily their entire career state. I'm not even
Speaker 4: entirely sure what the deep state is, but.
Speaker 3: It's a state that's very deep. Don't put that with.
Speaker 5: Us, but that's that.
Speaker 4: I mean, there literally are maybe a hundred, well if
Speaker 4: you count US attorneys a few hundred political appointees, out
Speaker 4: of one hundred and thirteen thousand employees at the Department
Speaker 4: of Justice.
Speaker 1: There's one hundred and thirteen thousand.
Speaker 4: Now, because understand this includes not just the folks who
Speaker 4: are prosecutors and lawyers there, and includes investigative agencies like
Speaker 4: the FBI and the ATF and DEA and the Marshall Service,
Speaker 4: and includes all of the Bureau of Prisons. It's a
Speaker 4: lot of people. So it's a very very small number
Speaker 4: of people who change with administrations and change depending on
Speaker 4: who the party is. So yeah, that the hallways there
Speaker 4: are filled with people who don't even know. I mean,
Speaker 4: I worked for over twenty years in the Atlanta US
Speaker 4: Attorney's office. I had no idea whether the folks next
Speaker 4: to me were Democrats or Republicans. Didn't know when we
Speaker 4: prosecuted public corruption cases.
Speaker 1: Didn't you were down Atlanta and you didn't know if
Speaker 1: they were Republicans.
Speaker 4: So yeah, okay, it's Atlanta is a blue dot inside
Speaker 4: an otherwise red state.
Speaker 5: But there were plenty of Republicans in our office, I'm sure. Yeah, No,
Speaker 5: there were plenty of Democrats as well.
Speaker 1: I believe that.
Speaker 5: Yeah. Are you gonna believe anything I do?
Speaker 11: Is that?
Speaker 5: Okay?
Speaker 1: Now, the way you can tell is you just do this,
Speaker 1: You walk in and go, who wants Chick fil A? Then?
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 3: So that's such an interesting.
Speaker 1: Because look, I am it's very difficult for me to
Speaker 1: trust the status quo of all these alphabet agencies FBI,
Speaker 1: ATF the other ones that you mentioned, because so often
Speaker 1: they are and maybe it's not the bulk of what
Speaker 1: they do do, but spying on Americans after nine to
Speaker 1: eleven through the Department Home out secret and I know
Speaker 1: they're not all related. So we're in this sort of
Speaker 1: uncomfortable position of saying the rule of law is important,
Speaker 1: but wouldn't you agree it's often bent against It is
Speaker 1: a rigged system in a lot of ways, just maybe
Speaker 1: not rigged against politicians, but rigged against the poor or
Speaker 1: people that don't have the means. You know, when you
Speaker 1: look at crack cocaine being sentenced at a different level
Speaker 1: than powder cocaine because of the populations that we're more
Speaker 1: associated with it. How do we have faith we're being
Speaker 1: asked to save this system that my whole life I've
Speaker 1: sort of viewed very suspiciously, you know, from Hoover on up.
Speaker 1: You know, you can't go through learning about Martin Luther
Speaker 1: King without thinking to yourself, damn, you know, we weaponize
Speaker 1: the government against citizens. Are what are the safeguards against that?
Speaker 1: What is the checks and mounts? You clearly believe in it, deeply?
Speaker 5: I do.
Speaker 4: Yeah, And you know, I think some suspicion is not
Speaker 4: a bad thing, because I think it's really important that
Speaker 4: we hold these institutions and the people who work there
Speaker 4: and who are in charge of them accountable.
Speaker 5: But you know you're right.
Speaker 4: Our nation's core promise, our fundamental promise that we made
Speaker 4: to all the people, as a promise of equal justice.
Speaker 4: That is a promise our country has never completely fulfilled.
Speaker 4: There have long been racial disparities in our criminal justice system.
Speaker 4: There are economic disparities. I would agree with you that
Speaker 4: there is, as much as you try to guard against that,
Speaker 4: there is a disparity between those defendants who are wealthy
Speaker 4: and those who are not. But it has always been
Speaker 4: the goal, It's always been the thing to which we
Speaker 4: aspire to be able to make good on that promise
Speaker 4: of equal justice. And that's what I fear is being lost,
Speaker 4: is I recognize that. Look, I'm not here as a
Speaker 4: Democrat or a Republican. I am a Democrat, but I'm
Speaker 4: not here is one or I.
Speaker 1: Could tell what we had catered to your dressing room.
Speaker 1: I know.
Speaker 5: Now totally the importance.
Speaker 1: I was right there, You're right there, you got this,
Speaker 1: Bring it to me, Bring it to me.
Speaker 5: But what was the question?
Speaker 1: Sorry, David, I'm so sorry for derailing that because you
Speaker 1: were going to I think what you were getting to
Speaker 1: is it's a system that has flaws, but that every
Speaker 1: day you've worked towards uh boy, you hate to say
Speaker 1: a more perfect union on it, but but but that
Speaker 1: you've worked towards, uh, making it more justsolutely and that
Speaker 1: has been the goal.
Speaker 5: And so so why is.
Speaker 1: This a threat when you just said, like, yeah, the threat.
Speaker 5: Now, the threat now?
Speaker 4: And this is not because he's a Republican. Donald Trump
Speaker 4: poses a unique threat to our criminal justice system and
Speaker 4: to that concept of equal justice.
Speaker 5: He's made really.
Speaker 4: Clear over and over again that he views the Department
Speaker 4: of Justice as his own personal goon squad for lack
Speaker 4: of a better term here, to go after the people
Speaker 4: that he wants to retaliate against, whether those are folks
Speaker 4: who have crossed him politically, whether it's people who just
Speaker 4: disagreed with him, whether it's people who wouldn't carry his water,
Speaker 4: that he wants to use the power of the state
Speaker 4: to literally criminally investigate them and try to send them
Speaker 4: to prison. And he's he's been really clear about that.
Speaker 1: He and as Devil's advocate on Yeah, I figured this
Speaker 1: was coming, wouldn't he say? That's what was done to him?
Speaker 1: That because he was a candidate for president, that in
Speaker 1: his mind and I'm not suggesting I'm in his mind,
Speaker 1: but you know, that's what he believes. The Russian investigation,
Speaker 1: that's what he believes. All of these cases, whether we
Speaker 1: believe them to be meritorious or not. What he would
Speaker 1: suggest is an unprecedented use of the Department of Justice,
Speaker 1: is how they've been operating against him, and so that
Speaker 1: firewall has already been breached in his mind.
Speaker 4: Well, first of all, if he thinks that, and I'm
Speaker 4: not one hundred percent convinced he genuinely thinks that. But
Speaker 4: even if he does, that doesn't make it true. Are
Speaker 4: you telling me that when someone fomented an insurrection as
Speaker 4: he did, that doj should just look away from that
Speaker 4: and not investigate it?
Speaker 1: By the way, Yeah, my belief was always why didn't
Speaker 1: we look into that? I wanted more alacrity on that
Speaker 1: before he was a candidate. Again, why were those wheels
Speaker 1: so difficult to start to churn?
Speaker 4: Yeah, Look, people have different approaches, and I think that
Speaker 4: my understanding is they were looking at it as a
Speaker 4: bottom up approach of the people who were out there,
Speaker 4: you know, actually storming the capitol. I mean I think
Speaker 4: in retrospect, you could look at that and see those
Speaker 4: folks probably don't have evidence in terms of direct conversations
Speaker 4: with Donald Trump, So maybe that wasn't the way to go.
Speaker 4: But you know, that's hindsight and that's me from outside
Speaker 4: saying that. But look, I don't think the Department should
Speaker 4: be the least bit apologetic about pursuing that. And I agree,
Speaker 4: if anything, I think we all wish it'd have been
Speaker 4: done sooner.
Speaker 1: Right, And then the document's case in the same way,
Speaker 1: because it is the difficulty was in that document's case,
Speaker 1: they go down there, they make a big deal, they
Speaker 1: raid the whole place, and then a week later they're like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: Biden's got a bunch of boxes in his garage and
Speaker 1: you're like, what is going on?
Speaker 5: Okay, not ideal?
Speaker 4: Yeah, but do you think it's a false equivalency?
Speaker 5: John, And I can tell you don't agree with me.
Speaker 1: Look, how is it a false equivalence in that? Yeah,
Speaker 1: he cooperated less. But if the idea is, you know,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of things that go into classified documents.
Speaker 1: We have a terrible system of classification. We overclassify everything,
Speaker 1: we redact everything. You know, very clearly they took a
Speaker 1: much harder line approach than they have probably with any
Speaker 1: other president. Look, I'm no fan of this guy. I
Speaker 1: think he absolutely runs roughshot over what would be democratic
Speaker 1: checks and balances. But as an outside observer, it's hard
Speaker 1: not to see cracks in the case that there weren't
Speaker 1: a lot of. And we can call it false equivalence
Speaker 1: or not, but it's close enough that it would give
Speaker 1: you pause.
Speaker 4: Well, I will say, you know, there was a special
Speaker 4: counsel that was appointed to investigate Biden in the Biden administration.
Speaker 4: I seriously doubt President Biden was too thrilled about that,
Speaker 4: But that.
Speaker 1: Is the special counsel. Think part of the whole thing,
Speaker 1: Like I remember Whitewater, you know, when we set up
Speaker 1: I think maybe part of the point is when you
Speaker 1: have a system of justice that's one hundred and thirty
Speaker 1: thousand employees and they're all dedicated, talented lawyers who believe
Speaker 1: in their case, isn't there always the danger that turning
Speaker 1: their spotlight on anything will reveal enough faults and crevices
Speaker 1: and cracks to find justification for legal peril.
Speaker 4: I think that is a risk of a special counsel.
Speaker 4: I mean, you should never investigate a person, that's a problem.
Speaker 4: You should never turn the spotlight on a person and
Speaker 4: say can I find a crime, because there's probably a
Speaker 4: pretty good chance you could find something out there on
Speaker 4: just about everybody.
Speaker 1: Why are you staring at me when you say that.
Speaker 4: Well, I was with DOJ for twenty seven years and
Speaker 4: I'm just saying that.
Speaker 1: The recreational shrooms I thought were legal. Hey, once they
Speaker 1: put them in chocolate, I think that technically makes it candy,
Speaker 1: I think. But that's my point to the You know,
Speaker 1: there is a lot of fear about the weaponization of
Speaker 1: this department, and I think possibly justified. I guess we're
Speaker 1: not going to know. There's certainly enough breadcrumbs there. They're
Speaker 1: certainly explicitly saying it. But I do look at our
Speaker 1: legalism as overreach has been a part of its history
Speaker 1: since you know. Look, I hate to keep going back
Speaker 1: to you know, Hoover, but it's difficult when you have
Speaker 1: a large organization like that, is it not? What are
Speaker 1: what are the checks on that? Yeah?
Speaker 4: And that's where I wish so much that people could,
Speaker 4: for example, sit in the conference room in the Atlanta
Speaker 4: US Attorney's office when we would have meetings we call
Speaker 4: them indictment review committee, meaning sounds really exciting, doesn't it?
Speaker 1: And was there cake.
Speaker 5: Only at the end?
Speaker 4: That's it, And people would come in and they would
Speaker 4: present the case. And oftentimes it's not a question of
Speaker 4: whether the evidence is there or not. The question is,
Speaker 4: even when the evidence is there, is this the kind
Speaker 4: of thing that is really worthy of federal prosecution? Is
Speaker 4: this the kind of conduct where we should be using
Speaker 4: our resources and this person should be a convicted felon
Speaker 4: at the end of it, Because there's not resources to
Speaker 4: prosecute everything, nor should you necessarily prosecute every single transgression
Speaker 4: that occurs. You're supposed to use that prosecutorial discretion to
Speaker 4: make sure that you're being fair and that that you're
Speaker 4: using the laws in the most effective way. And people
Speaker 4: really would.
Speaker 1: Agonex so subjective in many way, it's not where the
Speaker 1: evidence leads you. It's also the evidence leads us here.
Speaker 1: But is that worthy of art of our time and effort?
Speaker 4: Is that that's that's a portion of it, it's worthy
Speaker 4: of our time and effort, And is this conduct significant
Speaker 4: enough and bad enough to where this person should be
Speaker 4: prosecuted federally? Like for example, drug cases most makes the
Speaker 4: majority street level drug cases could be prosecuted federally. Does
Speaker 4: that make any sense? No, we should not be using
Speaker 4: federal resources on that. And a person who's involved in
Speaker 4: a street level deal really doesn't need to have a
Speaker 4: federal conviction. So if that's if that's prosecuted at all,
Speaker 4: as opposed to diversion or some other program that should
Speaker 4: be handled by the state technically, is it a federal crime, Yes,
Speaker 4: but is that a good use of resources?
Speaker 1: And is that necessarily each time? Why are there so
Speaker 1: many people in federal prisons on drug charges.
Speaker 4: Well, part of that is left over from the No seriously,
Speaker 4: we're people during the crack epikademic and in sentences.
Speaker 5: That were way way, way too long.
Speaker 4: We're being prosecuted, and they are still in federal prison
Speaker 4: now President Obama.
Speaker 1: They're still there, some of them are.
Speaker 8: Yeah.
Speaker 4: President Obama had a clemency initiative to try to adjust
Speaker 4: those and release scores of people who were just in
Speaker 4: prison for way too long, longer than public safety demanded
Speaker 4: there and the guidelines have been changed now, but there's
Speaker 4: some leftovers that are there. But also DOJ prosecutes It
Speaker 4: prosecutes major drug cartels that are operating here in the
Speaker 4: United States.
Speaker 5: That's the major distinction.
Speaker 1: So you're going for the big, not the little now right, right.
Speaker 1: They used to do the other, but now they've they
Speaker 1: flipped it to that. What about financial crimes?
Speaker 4: To me, that's where the department is it really should
Speaker 4: be focusing.
Speaker 5: A lot of its resources.
Speaker 1: Is that where they're focusing a lot of the Yeah,
Speaker 1: there are a lot.
Speaker 5: Of resources there.
Speaker 4: It's the only game in how local DA's can't do that.
Speaker 4: And these are like some of the most pernicious crimes
Speaker 4: where they are really praying on people's hard earned.
Speaker 1: Payday loan that got.
Speaker 4: All I mean, yeah, the full range of white color stuff.
Speaker 4: I say that used to be a white color prosecutor. Yeah,
Speaker 4: Why was it so hard after two thousand and eight?
Speaker 1: Why didn't anybody go to jail for that? After the
Speaker 1: financial crisis?
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's a tough one. Yeah, okay, yeah, right, So.
Speaker 1: You know what I'm saying about the case for the dj.
Speaker 3: Two steps forward, one step back, two step forward, one
Speaker 3: step back.
Speaker 1: So in your mind, though, the reforms that need to
Speaker 1: be done there, who would do those reforms? Who would
Speaker 1: reform the Department of Justice? Is it the nation's attorney general.
Speaker 1: Is that who would make these changes in who should
Speaker 1: go like who who's in charge?
Speaker 5: Well, the Attorney General is in charge.
Speaker 4: But when you say would make these reforms, are you.
Speaker 1: Talking about letting people out that had crack cocaine versus
Speaker 1: powder cocaine? Putting more resources in front of like the
Speaker 1: banks that launder money for terrorists and yet only pay
Speaker 1: a fine, which has happened numerous times over these past
Speaker 1: couple of decades. All the things that we look at
Speaker 1: as dodging of accountability for establishment status quote things and
Speaker 1: seeing poor people being sent to jail at a much
Speaker 1: higher rate. Who comes in there and says we have
Speaker 1: to stop this.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's done by the leadership at the Department of Justice,
Speaker 4: which includes the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General
Speaker 4: and the heads of the different divisions like the Criminal Division, any.
Speaker 1: Trust, Well decide what to focus on, and.
Speaker 4: Then each individual US attorney. They're ninety three US attorneys
Speaker 4: around the country and they are in charge broken up geographically,
Speaker 4: and they're in charge of the prosecution and the civil
Speaker 4: defense side as well of the prosecution of all federal
Speaker 4: crimes in that particular district and within that district. One
Speaker 4: of the things that US attorneys are responsible for doing
Speaker 4: is looking at that district and saying, Okay, what are
Speaker 4: the most serious crime threats here? In mine was the
Speaker 4: Northern district of Georgia. Okay, what's the most serious thing here?
Speaker 4: Where should we be using our limited resources? And what
Speaker 4: should be handled by the state. And you know, districts
Speaker 4: are different. My district is going to be different than
Speaker 4: like Iowa or some place like that. Right, But that's
Speaker 4: done at the leadership, and then that is to be
Speaker 4: carried out by all of the career people who are
Speaker 4: within the department.
Speaker 1: Now, if they get an Attorney General who comes in
Speaker 1: there and says, I want you to prosecute journalists and
Speaker 1: Democrats and short Jews, purely hypothetical.
Speaker 5: What if it's a three firm, go for all three?
Speaker 1: What is what is the recourse there? Do they just
Speaker 1: argue it or do they say, you know, we keep
Speaker 1: hearing about they threatened a mass resignation, which, but for
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, that would be what he wants. He would
Speaker 1: want people who wouldn't do that to say bye bye
Speaker 1: and he just fill them with other people.
Speaker 4: Right, Well, look, if that, first of all, we know
Speaker 4: they're already are career people at the Department of Justice
Speaker 4: who are looking for jobs because they are worried about
Speaker 4: being in a justice department that is weaponized in this
Speaker 4: way and not for legitimate reasons. And if you are
Speaker 4: told to do something like that, you have a few options.
Speaker 4: You can say no, maybe they find another prosecutor to
Speaker 4: do it. You can resign, which is another option. You
Speaker 4: can also raise it if you think something is really
Speaker 4: out of bounds, you can raise it to what they
Speaker 4: call the inspector General within the Department of Justice. If
Speaker 4: you're being told, who's that Michael Horowitz is his name?
Speaker 1: No, I was a rhetorical question, but yeah, what's the
Speaker 1: role of the inspector General.
Speaker 4: The inspector General is looks at fraud and abuse and
Speaker 4: misconduct with the Department of Justice.
Speaker 1: Oh, I see like an inspector right general?
Speaker 5: Hence the name.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, is it hard talking to people like me?
Speaker 1: Don't understand that? And so in your mind, are there
Speaker 1: enough fail safe if this is the worst case scenario
Speaker 1: is going to come to pass. Do you believe that
Speaker 1: that system is robust enough to withstand that type of thing.
Speaker 5: I think it has to be.
Speaker 4: I mean, we don't have a choice. It's going to
Speaker 4: have to be robust enough. And look, I am hopeful
Speaker 4: that even though, look, the president has identified four people
Speaker 4: who were members of his criminal defense team or impeachment
Speaker 4: team to be in top four slots at the department.
Speaker 5: That's not a great sign, you know, coming from a guy.
Speaker 1: Don't they normally pick like lawyers they've worked with, or
Speaker 1: people that they know.
Speaker 4: No, they pick people they know, but not usually like
Speaker 4: their criminal defense lawyers. Happily, we've not had that many
Speaker 4: presidents who needed criminal defense lawyers. But look, there's nothing
Speaker 4: wrong with a president wanting someone in whom they have
Speaker 4: confidence and someone that they trust. The problem is here
Speaker 4: that Donald Trump complained about Jeff Sessions, where's my Roy Kohane,
Speaker 4: which you know sort of infamous or famous bob lawyer.
Speaker 1: There.
Speaker 4: He expected the Attorney general to act as his personal hitchman.
Speaker 4: That's what he's looking for. So when he puts the
Speaker 4: folks in there that were his.
Speaker 5: But I'm hopeful, I'm hopeful.
Speaker 4: Still, I want to give a little please please there
Speaker 4: that they, despite of how they might be getting there,
Speaker 4: that they're going to take their oath seriously and recognize
Speaker 4: they do not represent Donald Trump they represent the people.
Speaker 1: Of the United States and the Constitution, and the Constitution
Speaker 1: in your mouth to God's ears.
Speaker 11: Former you have attorney Generald Salieri.
Speaker 2: Great, let me write back after this bok up show
Speaker 2: today night.
Speaker 1: But before we go, we're gonna check it with your
Speaker 1: host for the.
Speaker 3: Rest of the week, mister Ronnie Chang. Ronnie, what's talking about?
Speaker 3: I see what you see.
Speaker 1: Telling the people what you got lined up for the
Speaker 1: rest of the week run. I'll tell you why I
Speaker 1: have got lined up John crack cocaine.
Speaker 11: I'm gonna smoke it right here live on TV, So
Speaker 11: tune in tomorrow everybody.
Speaker 3: I'll be smoking crack.
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna assume that's some sort of a hysterical
Speaker 1: statement about Hunter Biden's partner.
Speaker 3: Who's Hunter Biden? Ronnie Chang. All week, Ladies and gentlemen.
Speaker 7: Explore more shows from the Daily Show podcast universe by
Speaker 7: searching The.
Speaker 3: Daily Show wherever you get your podcasts. Watch The Daily
Speaker 3: Show weeknights at eleven ten.
Speaker 8: Central on Comedy Central, and stream full episodes anytime on
Speaker 8: Paramount plus.
Speaker 1: Paramount Podcasts